Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 4507
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 4507.99 (2026)

Penalty

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Unless another penalty is provided by the section that contains the provision violated or otherwise is provided by the laws of this state, whoever violates any provision of sections 4507.01 to 4507.081 or 4507.10 to 4507.37 of the Revised Code is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases, 1978–2007 · leading case: State v. Evans, 618 N.E.2d 162 (Ohio 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Evans, 618 N.E.2d 162 (Ohio 1993). “35 is currently punishable under R.C. 4507.99(F) as a misdemeanor of the first degree.”
State v. Venham, 645 N.E.2d 831 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994). “35 is currently punishable under R.C. 4507.99(F) as a misdemeanor of the first degree.”
State v. Blatnik, 478 N.E.2d 1016 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984). “Pursuant to R.C. 4507.99 (B), appellant was sentenced to a six-month term of imprisonment.”
State v. Donkers, 867 N.E.2d 903 (Ohio Ct. App. 2007). “At the time, the penalties for driving without a valid license were provided in R.C. 4507.99. Specifically, this statute provided: {¶ 82} “(D) Whoever violates division (A)(1) or (3) of section 4507.”
State v. Jackson, 605 N.E.2d 426 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “” See R.C. 4507.99(A). A violation of R.C. 4507.”
State v. Evans, 1993 Ohio 186 (Ohio 1993). “35 is currently punishable under R.C. 4507.99(F) as a misdemeanor of the first degree.”
City of Indep. v. Tector, 688 N.E.2d 276 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 3× “The penalty section for that violation is R.C. 4507.99(C)(4). R.C. 4507.99(C)(4) classifies driving with a suspended license as a misdemeanor and provides: “[T]he court, in addition to or independent of all other penalties provided by law, may suspend for a period not to exceed…”
State v. Caynor, 755 N.E.2d 984 (Ohio Ct. App. 2001). “02(A)(1), which, pursuant to R.C. 4507.99(H), is a first-degree misdemeanor.”
State v. Shin, 693 N.E.2d 1120 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 3× “02(D)(1), and not subject to any vehicle forfeiture possibilities pursuant to R.C. 4507.99(A). Plaintiff filed this appeal from the trial court’s judgment entry and lists the following two assignments of error: “I.”
State v. Bronaugh, 475 N.E.2d 171 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984). “The offense is punishable by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars and/or a term of incarceration of not more than six months, R.C. 4507.99, and is, therefore, greater in degree than a minor misdemeanor.”
Vill. of Brewster v. Sexton, 598 N.E.2d 204 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992). “99, and six months for the DUS charge, R.C. 4507.99[A]). R.C. 2929.21(B)(1). If the appellant had been sentenced on April 10, 1990, to the maximum potential penalty of incarceration, and execution thereof immediately invoked, he would have been beyond the power and authority of…”
City of Ironton v. Murnahan, 539 N.E.2d 649 (Ohio Ct. App. 1987). “Accordingly, a failure to display a driver’s license upon demand constitutes an offense and is subject to the penalty provided in R.C. 4507.99(B). The second assignment of error is overruled.”
Show all 20 citing cases →
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4507.99(A) — 6 cases
State v. Jackson, 605 N.E.2d 426 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992). “” See R.C. 4507.99(A). A violation of R.C. 4507.”
State v. Shin, 693 N.E.2d 1120 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). “02(D)(1), and not subject to any vehicle forfeiture possibilities pursuant to R.C. 4507.99(A). Plaintiff filed this appeal from the trial court’s judgment entry and lists the following two assignments of error: “I.”
State v. Cook, 596 N.E.2d 578 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991).
State v. Kasarda, 612 N.E.2d 484 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992).
State v. Insprucker, 385 N.E.2d 324 (Ohio Ct. App. 1978).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4507.99(B) — 2 cases
City of Ironton v. Murnahan, 539 N.E.2d 649 (Ohio Ct. App. 1987). “Accordingly, a failure to display a driver’s license upon demand constitutes an offense and is subject to the penalty provided in R.C. 4507.99(B). The second assignment of error is overruled.”
State v. Farkas, 580 N.E.2d 1154 (Ohio Ct. App. 1989).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4507.99(C) — 2 cases
State v. Shin, 693 N.E.2d 1120 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). “02(D)(1), and not subject to any vehicle forfeiture possibilities pursuant to R.C. 4507.99(A). Plaintiff filed this appeal from the trial court’s judgment entry and lists the following two assignments of error: “I.”
State v. Oklata, 804 N.E.2d 1024 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004).
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4507.99(C)(3) — 1 case
State v. Shin, 693 N.E.2d 1120 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). “02(D)(1), and not subject to any vehicle forfeiture possibilities pursuant to R.C. 4507.99(A). Plaintiff filed this appeal from the trial court’s judgment entry and lists the following two assignments of error: “I.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4507.99(C)(4) — 1 case
City of Indep. v. Tector, 688 N.E.2d 276 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996). “The penalty section for that violation is R.C. 4507.99(C)(4). R.C. 4507.99(C)(4) classifies driving with a suspended license as a misdemeanor and provides: “[T]he court, in addition to or independent of all other penalties provided by law, may suspend for a period not to exceed…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4507.99(F) — 3 cases
State v. Evans, 618 N.E.2d 162 (Ohio 1993). “35 is currently punishable under R.C. 4507.99(F) as a misdemeanor of the first degree.”
State v. Venham, 645 N.E.2d 831 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994). “35 is currently punishable under R.C. 4507.99(F) as a misdemeanor of the first degree.”
State v. Evans, 1993 Ohio 186 (Ohio 1993). “35 is currently punishable under R.C. 4507.99(F) as a misdemeanor of the first degree.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 4507.99(H) — 1 case
State v. Caynor, 755 N.E.2d 984 (Ohio Ct. App. 2001). “02(A)(1), which, pursuant to R.C. 4507.99(H), is a first-degree misdemeanor.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.